You Want Dates For The End Of This Reaction?

Posted at 10:46 PM (CST) by & filed under General Editorial.

Dear CIGAs,

You wants dates? Ok.

The bet on the short of gold side is that the Sequester takes place. I have felt that the gold market’s longest period of reaction possible would end on my birthday, March 27th. That puts it directly in place of this wager in time.

Regardless of whether or not Sequester occurs, I stand by this timing assumption that I have held since this decline started.

Many who I know and asked me in private know this statement to be true. I know that this is read by just those that are at the heart of this decline.

The earliest date of the end of the decline is the 28th of February and the longest period of pressure is until the 27th of March. Thereafter gold is released to the upside which will be a minimum of $3500.

Defend yourselves because today was a wager on the Sequester occurring. Regardless, do not give away your position in either gold or shares that are fully paid for. Margin is madness in gold because the volatility is only starting.

Please note the last interview I gave was about 9 months ago. I have a planned interview with Eric King of www.KingWorldNews.com on Friday of this week. It will have significance as it is a statement. Please remember this in the future.

Sequestration Cuts Crisis Makes Me Want to Strangle Both Sides
POSTED: February 26, 2:45 PM ET

If you can get past how horrifying it is, the looming "sequestration cuts" crisis is fascinating. It’s like watching a bunch of gambling addicts play craps by throwing dice into a four-dimensional wormhole. There are so many variables that neither side can possibly know the true outcome of a failure to make a deal – which means the only certainty is that what we’re watching is irresponsibility on an epic scale, wherein both of our major political parties seem to prefer government by random outcome over one managed by sensible compromise.

Obviously, most of the problem was originally driven by the intractability of a Republican Party energized politically by its Tea Party base, which preferred the nuclear option of a default or a government shutdown to increased debt and/or new taxes. These fine folks taped sticks of dynamite to their chests and threatened to blow the government, its credit rating and our entire budget mechanism to the moon if we didn’t make massive spending cuts – a wild ploy that may not have made a ton of patriotic sense given the catastrophic possibilities of, say, a default, but certainly helped the party solidify its relationship with its base.

Watching the original Republican debt-ceiling warriors furiously shake their fists over this business reminded me of that great line by Claude Rains in Casablanca, when his Captain Renault character tells Humphrey Bogart why he had to be so rough in tossing Rick’s nightclub in search of the missing letters of transit. "I told my men to be especially destructive," Rains said. "You know how that impresses Germans."

This "let’s blow up the American credit rating" ploy impressed hardcore anti-spending types in the same way. It was crazy, but maybe only slightly more crazy than both of the parties have consistently been for most of the last 20 years, when the two sides have continually failed to hammer out workable budgets and instead have mostly just let the national airplane fly mindlessly forward using the laziness-enabling autopilot mechanism of a continuing resolutions, or CRs. Despite the fact that working out budgets is mostly what we hire members of Congress to do, they seem to have a terrible time doing it on time, and instead routinely rely upon the CR process (in which the two sides basically agree to put things off until later) to keep funding levels static for some ludicrously short-term period like six months.

The failure to work out sensible budgets makes it impossible for government agencies to make long-term plans, and instead leaves them scrambling to spend money in the short term. It’s an incredibly stupid way of doing business and if these people weren’t on television so often, ranting and raving like baseball managers arguing a safe call at the plate and playing to the home crowd by pointing fingers at the other side, they would probably just do what members of Congress traditionally did in the pre-mass-media age, which is quietly and (mostly) sensibly work things out, getting as much as they could for their own constituents without crossing the line into antipatriotic acts of self-destruction – like a national default, for instance.

But since those days of sensible bipartisanship are gone, what we’re left with is this. Both sides decided to play political chicken with our economic futures. Certainly the Republicans were more willing to pull the pin here, but the Democrats also gambled.

More…